The increasing fascination with Proportional Representation by opposition political parties should be looked at more as a strategy for survival than a genuine concern to improve the electoral system.
A lurch towards such an electoral reform will not only prove unconstructive, but would also spell an end to political certainty and stability as we have come to know it in Botswana.
We should eschew a political system that gives too much power to party chiefs and their underlings – and that is a prime character of Proportional Representation that opposition are, strange enough, unanimous in advocating.
Proportional Representation takes power away from the people and gives it to the party bosses whose sole responsibility is to deploy others by way of party lists.
By their very nature, party bosses strangle the growth of democracy while instinctively increasing their own power and influence.
By its very nature Proportional Representation does not factor people’s wishes into decision making organs.
Proportional Representation disempowers ordinary people.
And that is not the way to go.
Even more, as a country, we cannot afford to experiment with the stability and political certainty of a country especially at the behest and whims of entities that are themselves not stable like Botswana’s opposition parties.
Opposition parties in Botswana have been accomplices in their self destruction.
They have squandered whatever moral authority they ever had to be taken seriously in important matters like the electoral system.
Botswana is probably the only country where parties can behave disgracefully and turn around to blame their victims as opposition parties have lately been doing with their renewed game of passing the blame.
The important thing, though, is that they have now stopped to matter, and the ruling party should rid itself of any anxieties it may have had about its survival in office and rather start concentrating on entrenching good governance across all state organs.
With all talk of opposition unity now a frustrated dream, made worse by their failure to marshal an intellectual challenge to the ruling party, the BDP can now set their horizons on those projects that have nothing to do with self preservation but rather aim at enhancing the quality of life for citizens including those let down by the opposition.
Opposition parties have to be forced to mend their own small houses before they start causing troubles at national level.
In short, adopting Proportional Representation would amount to a reckless shift backward, sadly at the time when other nations are moving our way of “winner takes it all.”
That said, there are complaints that the State President in Botswana has too much power.
That is a genuine concern.
But the situation will get worse under Proportional Representation because under such a system the President will go as far as to personally decide (through his party list) who can become an MP and who can become a councilor. That will be in addition to appointing a host of other executives in the public service as currently empowered.
While one is amenable to a suggestion for direct election of State President, beyond that we should exercise caution and restraint.
Even Zimbabwe, a country we like to give as an example of a madhouse, is more democratic than Botswana at least in as far as the President is elected directly by the people.
Our current system has faults but they all pale into oblivion when put side by side with PR which opposition parties are, strangely, so united and unanimous in advocating.
Constituency based system, which we have adopted since independence takes care of the voters much more than the PR can ever do.
Already the nation is grappling with the endemic problems of voter apathy; the situation will get out of control under Proportional Representation.
Worse, Proportional Representation entrenches docility because those who question the party chiefs are placed at the bottom of the list (or left out) while the boys in the good books will have their names at the top next to that of a party chief.
It is difficult to see how that will enrich debate and, more importantly, democracy which has its roots in accommodating the will of the people; even if it means condoning dissent.
Our current system allows, in fact demands, a direct and frequent interaction between the politicians and the voters, precisely because ultimate power ultimately resides with the voters.
There is no such interaction under a system of Proportional Representation.
The biggest fault with our current system is that it does not allow for a direct election of State President.
That is where emphasis should be.
Direct election of the president would go a long way in enhancing people’s regard for the President.
As of now the President relies exclusively on the wildly immense powers bestowed on him by many statutes.
In a proper democracy, legitimacy of power resides with people, yet in Botswana a State President enjoys immense power but no direct legitimacy.
To enjoy greater public confidence, an umbilical cord directly linking the President and the people has to be established.
It may be a good idea to start financing political parties from public coffers. But if they are determined to kill each other when there is nothing to fight for what will become of opposition parties when there is money in their midst?
Beyond that all Proportional Representation can wait until sanity returns to opposition parties.
